Silence is a Climate Risk – Brands Urged to Trumpet Sustainability Progress

Why companies are hiding their climate progress

UK businesses face a communications challenge. Many have made real progress on sustainability but are afraid to talk about it. This phenomenon has a name: greenhushing. Companies worry that any public statement about environmental work will invite accusations of greenwashing.

The scale of this silence is significant. Research from Futurebuild, the Carbon Literacy Project, and Hattrick found that over a third of built environment professionals say their organisations have pulled back from sustainability communications. Two thirds report increased fear of greenwashing allegations. The problem extends beyond the UK. A survey covering 125 countries found that 53% of consumers interpret corporate silence on sustainability as either inaction or deliberate concealment.

This retreat from transparency creates commercial and strategic problems. Companies doing genuine work gain no recognition for it. Investors struggle to identify environmental leaders. Supply chains lose visibility of progress. Most importantly, the collective momentum needed to reach net zero targets weakens when successes remain invisible.

A new guide launched in Paris argues that silence now poses a greater risk than exaggeration. Creatives for Climate and B Lab released their framework at ChangeNOW 2026 on March 30th. The guide promotes what they call greenshouting: making verifiable sustainability progress publicly visible. It offers a structured approach to transparent communication backed by evidence rather than marketing claims.

The shift from greenwashing fears to communication paralysis

Greenhushing emerged as a direct response to intensified scrutiny of environmental claims. Companies watched regulators crack down on misleading statements. Legal teams advised caution. Marketing departments pulled campaigns. The result was widespread silence, even from businesses with substantive programmes.

Several factors accelerated this trend through 2025. Political backlash against ESG initiatives created a hostile environment for sustainability communications. New regulations introduced complexity and legal risk. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive brought mandatory disclosure requirements. California’s SB 253 imposed emissions reporting obligations. Companies struggled to navigate these requirements while avoiding accusations of overclaiming.

The built environment sector shows how quickly confidence eroded. Professionals report that organisations with established sustainability programmes now hesitate to share progress. Fear of getting details wrong outweighs the potential benefits of transparency. This caution spreads beyond marketing into operational decisions about whether to pursue certifications or set public targets.

However, consumer expectations moved in the opposite direction. The same research found that 89% of people across 125 countries want stronger climate action from companies. This gap between public demand and corporate silence creates a vacuum. Lucy von Sturmer of Creatives for Climate warns that when companies go quiet, they leave space for bad actors to dominate the narrative.

B Lab emphasises a core principle in their new framework: imperfect action shared openly drives far more change than perfect action kept quiet. This perspective challenges the perfectionism that often underlies greenhushing. Companies wait for flawless credentials before speaking, but transparency during the journey matters more than polished final announcements.

Understanding the greenshouting framework released in Paris

The guide launched at the Grand Palais provides practical structure for businesses ready to communicate again. It is freely available at creativesforclimate.co/greenshouting. The framework developed by Creatives for Climate, B Lab, and Nice and Serious builds on three foundational steps before any public communication begins.

First, companies need a robust sustainability strategy. This means clear objectives, measurement systems, and accountability mechanisms. The guide stresses that communication should follow substance, not replace it. Second, all claims require verification through data and third-party validation where appropriate. Finally, the framework introduces seven principles they call the Seven Dials of Greenshouting.

These principles emphasise demonstrable progress over aspirational statements. The guide includes case studies from more than 15 companies across sectors, plus insights from public sector and NGO leaders. These examples show how organisations at different stages can communicate truthfully about both achievements and ongoing challenges.

The framework distinguishes between transparency and promotion. Greenshouting means sharing verifiable information about actions taken, results measured, and targets set. It does not mean claiming environmental leadership or using sustainability as a primary marketing message. The difference matters for legal compliance and public trust.

This approach addresses the practical concern that stopped many communications programmes: how to talk about progress without triggering greenwashing accusations. The answer involves specificity, evidence, and honesty about limitations. Companies can describe what they have done, what they have measured, and what remains incomplete. This combination builds credibility better than selective disclosure or silence.

Commercial consequences of sustainability silence

Greenhushing creates measurable business disadvantages. Companies that avoid sustainability communications underperform financially compared to those maintaining transparency. Research cited in the guide found that 31% of market leaders’ reputational advantage connects directly to environmental perceptions. When genuine progress stays invisible, this competitive edge disappears.

Investor considerations compound the problem. ESG criteria now influence capital allocation across most sectors. Fund managers need data to assess environmental performance. Companies that provide no information get excluded from sustainability-focused investment vehicles or face higher costs of capital. Silence signals risk rather than caution to financial markets.

Supply chain dynamics add another layer. Large buyers increasingly require environmental disclosure from suppliers. Public sector procurement in the UK includes carbon reduction commitments through PPN 06/21. Private sector supply chains follow similar patterns. Suppliers who cannot or will not discuss their environmental work lose tender opportunities regardless of their actual performance.

The guide describes this as a sustainability doom loop. Invisible progress fails to attract investment or recognition. Reduced investment limits further improvement. Diminished results provide even less to communicate. The cycle continues downward while competitors who maintain transparency gain advantage.

Trust erosion affects entire sectors, not just individual companies. When industry leaders go silent, public perception assumes lack of progress across the board. This collective reputation damage makes it harder for all businesses to engage customers on environmental issues. The built environment sector survey data illustrates this dynamic clearly.

Market differentiation becomes impossible without communication. Two companies may have identical environmental programmes, but only the one willing to share that information gains commercial benefit. This creates perverse incentives where communication strategy matters more than actual performance. The greenshouting framework aims to reverse this by making substantive progress visible while maintaining rigorous standards for claims.

What UK businesses need to know

Several key points emerge from the greenhushing trend and the response through greenshouting principles. These matter for UK companies navigating sustainability communications:

• Silence on genuine environmental progress now carries greater strategic risk than carefully evidenced transparency about ongoing work and measured results.
• Over one third of built environment professionals report their organisations have reduced sustainability communications due to greenwashing fears, creating competitive disadvantage.
• Consumer research across 125 countries found that 53% interpret corporate silence on environmental matters as either inaction or deliberate concealment of poor performance.
• The greenshouting framework requires three foundations before communication: robust strategy, claim verification, and adherence to seven principles emphasising demonstrable progress over aspirational statements.
• Financial performance data shows that 31% of market leading companies’ reputational advantage connects to environmental perceptions, which requires visible communication to maintain.
• UK supply chain requirements including PPN 06/21 mean that suppliers unable to discuss environmental programmes face exclusion from tenders regardless of actual performance levels.
• The framework from Creatives for Climate and B Lab provides free practical guidance at creativesforclimate.co/greenshouting with case studies from more than 15 organisations.

How transparency requirements are changing the equation

Mandatory disclosure regulations are removing the option of silence. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive affects UK companies with European operations or customers. These rules require specific environmental data in annual reports. California’s SB 253 similarly mandates emissions reporting for large companies doing business in that state.

Consequently, many organisations will need to publish environmental information whether they want to or not. This regulatory shift makes communication strategy essential rather than optional. Companies must decide how to frame required disclosures and whether to provide additional context beyond minimum compliance.

The greenshouting framework aligns with this regulatory direction. It provides structure for companies transitioning from voluntary silence to mandatory transparency. Moreover, businesses that develop clear communication approaches now will handle regulatory requirements more effectively than those forced to respond reactively.

Sector-specific requirements add complexity. Financial services face climate risk disclosure rules. Manufacturing deals with product lifecycle regulations. Construction must address embodied carbon. Each sector needs communication strategies appropriate to its specific obligations and stakeholder expectations.

Strategic communication planning should start before disclosure deadlines arrive. This means establishing measurement systems, setting internal targets, and developing governance processes. Furthermore, it involves training teams to discuss environmental performance accurately without overclaiming or underselling genuine progress.

The built environment survey revealed that professionals want guidance on safe communication. They recognise that silence creates problems but lack confidence in alternatives. The greenshouting framework offers this missing guidance through principles rather than prescriptive templates. This approach allows adaptation to different sectors and company sizes while maintaining rigorous standards.

Creating communication approaches that build rather than undermine trust

Effective sustainability communication requires balance between transparency and accuracy. The greenshouting principles provide a starting point, but implementation demands careful consideration of audience, evidence, and context. UK businesses should focus on several practical elements.

Specificity matters more than scope. Describing precise actions with measured results builds more credibility than broad environmental commitments. For example, stating that a facility reduced gas consumption by 23% through specific equipment upgrades communicates more effectively than claiming to be on a journey to net zero. Both might be true, but the specific claim provides verifiable information.

Acknowledging limitations strengthens rather than weakens messages. Companies can explain what they have not yet addressed alongside what they have achieved. This honesty signals genuine engagement rather than selective disclosure. Additionally, it demonstrates understanding of the full scope of environmental challenges rather than cherry-picking easy wins.

Evidence standards should match the significance of claims. Minor operational improvements need basic documentation. Substantial environmental achievements require third-party verification. Businesses should align their evidence to the weight of their statements. This proportionality helps avoid both under-substantiation and excessive documentation costs for routine updates.

Our net-zero program for carbon reporting compliance helps organisations establish the measurement and verification systems that underpin credible communication. Without robust data, even modest claims become difficult to substantiate. Subsequently, investment in measurement infrastructure enables transparency that would otherwise remain impossible.

Timing considerations affect credibility. Announcing targets differs from reporting progress. Companies should communicate milestones as they occur rather than waiting for complete programmes. This ongoing transparency builds trust more effectively than infrequent major announcements. It also normalises discussion of both successes and challenges.

Legal review remains important but should not prevent all communication. Businesses can work with advisors to identify language that accurately describes work without creating undue legal exposure. The goal is careful communication, not silence. Furthermore, regulatory requirements increasingly make some disclosure mandatory regardless of legal caution.

Training teams across organisations ensures consistent and accurate external communication. Sustainability knowledge should extend beyond environmental managers to anyone discussing company operations. Our SBS Academy training on environmental topics helps build this organisational capability, ensuring that communication remains accurate and appropriate across all channels and contexts.

Where to find authoritative guidance and regulatory information

Several resources provide additional detail for UK businesses developing sustainability communication strategies. These sources offer current regulatory information and practical frameworks beyond the greenshouting guide.

The UK government’s guidance on environmental claims provides the regulatory baseline for any business communication about sustainability. This includes requirements under consumer protection law and sector-specific rules. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero publishes regular updates on climate policy affecting business obligations.

The Competition and Markets Authority released detailed guidance on environmental claims and greenwashing that establishes legal expectations for UK businesses. This document clarifies what constitutes misleading environmental marketing and provides examples of acceptable and unacceptable claims. Subsequently, it serves as essential reading before developing any sustainability communications.

The Advertising Standards Authority maintains current rulings on environmental claims in advertising and marketing. These decisions illustrate how regulators interpret general principles in specific cases. Reviewing recent rulings helps businesses understand the boundaries of acceptable communication.

The greenshouting framework itself remains freely available at creativesforclimate.co/greenshouting with case studies and detailed guidance. This resource complements regulatory documents by providing positive examples rather than just restrictions and prohibitions.

Our compliance services help UK businesses navigate the intersection of environmental reporting requirements and communication obligations. As regulations evolve and disclosure becomes mandatory, having clear processes for both measurement and communication becomes essential for managing risk while maintaining transparency that supports commercial objectives.